Marquette Warrior

We are here to provide an independent, rather skeptical view of events at Marquette University. Comments are enabled on most posts, but extended comments are welcome and can be e-mailed to jmcadams2@juno.com. E-mailed comments will be treated like Letters to the Editor.
This site has no official connection with Marquette University. Indeed, when University officials find out about it, they will doubtless want it shut down.

From a Public Safety Alert sent out shortly after midnight last night:

An armed robbery was reported at 11:50 p.m., August 30. An alumna and a student were in the 800 block of North 22nd Street when they were approached by two males who showed a weapon and demanded cash. One of the subjects took the alumna’s purse, then both fled northbound on foot on North 22nd Street then westbound on West Kilbourn Avenue. Both subjects are described as African American males in their late teens or early twenties, clean shaven with short hair. The first subject, who was armed, was described as wearing a gray hoodie with blue lettering and dark shorts. The second subject was described as wearing a dark hoodie and dark shorts.

It’s good that Marquette has backed off a silly, excessively politically correct policy.

But the University’s failure to honestly acknowledge the policy still leaves a bad odor.

Sunday, August 28, 2011

Marquette Students Victims of Armed Robbery: University Conceals Race of Suspects

Marquette routinely sends out “Public Safety Alerts” when there has been a crime near campus. Those alerts serve to warn members of the Marquette community to be careful. But also, the alerts virtually always include a description of the suspect or suspects. Presumably, some alert person might see and report the suspects.

Until just recently, the descriptions have included the one most useful piece of information: the race of the suspect.

A public safety alert in 2008, for example, described two armed robbery suspects as follows:

Marquette Public Safety responded to an armed robbery about 11:30 p.m. Sunday (July 31). An alumnus was approached by two suspects with a weapon in the 700 block of North 23rd Street. The victim surrendered his cell phone and some keys. The two suspects fled northbound onto North 23rd Street and then westbound onto West Wells Street. The victim was not physically injured during the incident. Both DPS and the Milwaukee Police Department searched the area and are still investigating.

What is missing? Any description of the robbers at all.

We thought this odd, and made an inquiry with Kate Venne, official spokeswoman for Marquette, and was told that the only descriptions available from the victim were too vague to be of any value. We called Public Safety, and an officer there told us they did not want to “profile” on the basis of race, and repeated that the descriptions were too vague.

The Pretense Blown

But then Saturday night, we got yet another Public Safety Alert, describing yet another armed robbery. The description of the suspect was given as follows:

A man, described as in his 40s, approximately 5’8” tall, wearing a white t-shirt, dark pants, a black baseball cap and a fanny pack, approached a student outside a residence in the 2100 block of West Michigan Avenue.

This isn’t vague. In fact it’s pretty precise. Yet there is no mention of the race of the robber.

We wrote Venne, asking why the race of the robber was not mentioned, and she responded that:

Hi John: Those decisions are made on a case by case basis in consultation with DPS.

Thanks.

This, of course, was an evasion, not an answer. So we e-mailed her back and asked:

Then perhaps you can explain why, in this case, there was no mention of race?

It’s not credible that the race of the offender was not known. It is also not credible that it would not be helpful in identifying the person, should he try to rob somebody again.

She has not responded.

Then very shortly thereafter, we received yet another Public Safety Alert, describing yet another armed robbery. The two suspects were described as follows:

The first man is described as between 22 and 25 years old, thin build and was wearing a black hoodie and blue jeans. The second man is described as approximately the same age, thin build, 6’0 tall wearing blue jeans and a grey t-shirt.

Again, we have two very specific descriptions, and no mention of race.

Venne’s claim that decisions to reveal the race of a robber are made on a “case by case” basis simply has no credibility. There is no conceivable justification for including a rather detailed description and omitting race.

What was have here is obviously yet another example of political correctness.

Ironically, failure to include race won’t stop people from concluding that the robbers were black. Given neighborhoods near Marquette, and the well-known fact that blacks in Milwaukee commit proportionally many more crimes than whites, everybody will assume that the offender whose race is concealed is black.

And this applies to people who are too politically correct to admit that they assume that.

What Should Parents Think?

We are sure that parents who pay good money to send their children to Marquette truly appreciate the fact that when their children’s safety conflicts with political correctness, the former is sacrificed to the latter.

And of course we all will draw certain conclusions when Marquette, through its spokeswoman, provides an evasive and disingenuous explanation.

. . . an annual event sponsored by RHA that promotes awareness about many social justice issues facing the world today. The experience of attending Remove the Blindfold should stimulate thoughts, feelings, and emotions around the issues and images presented. The hope is that through this experience, students will become more aware of social injustices and move toward positive change by taking action.

Such events, of course, are profoundly anti-intellectual. It’s assumed that there are no contentious issues about which there is a legitimate debate. Rather, there is only “injustice.” And it’s always obvious to those who have “removed the blindfold” what constitutes an injustice. For example, it’s assumes that a lack of affirmative action is an injustice. If you believe that having affirmative action is an injustice, you must be a racist.

And note the elitist assumption that people who don’t see the world the way ORL staff do are blinded. In fact, ORL staff live in the narrow and parochial world of student affairs bureaucrats, and lack both the competence and the open-mindedness to deal with serious public issues.

As an RA for 2 years, I was required to participate in this program, as well as numerous other “diversity” oriented programs. I can say with no amount of exaggeration that they were very anti-male, anti-white, etc. We were bussed to the LGBT Center on MLK Drive as part of our “sensitivity training,” and it was intimated that anyone whose personal beliefs contradicted their agenda was backward and bigoted.

This stuff is all over in MU’s administration. As an openly Evangelical Christian, there were numerous times when I was made to feel that my beliefs were not acceptable within ORL. The ironic thing about the PC movement is that everyone’s beliefs are acceptable unless you disagree with them...

Friday, August 26, 2011

Feminism Explained

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Speakers at the Law School

On the Issues with Mike Gousha

Tuesday, September 6—Gordon Haberman, father of 9-11 victim Andrea Haberman—On September 11, 2001, Gordon Haberman’s 25-year-old daughter was on a business trip to New York. Andrea Haberman was on the 92nd floor of the north tower of the World Trade Center when terrorists slammed a hijacked plane into the building. She and 3,000 others died in the series of attacks on America on 9-11. Just days before the 10th anniversary of the attacks, Gordon Haberman will share the story of his daughter and his family’s search for answers and justice. It’s a journey that has taken him from Washington County to Washington, D.C, and all the way to Guantánamo. What have we learned 10 years after 9-11? Marquette Law School, Eckstein Hall, 12:15 to 1:15 p.m. Registration link.

Friday, September 16—State Senators Dale Schultz and Tim Cullen—Senator Schultz is a Republican from Richland Center. Senator Cullen is a Democrat from Janesville. Together, they’ve launched what they’re calling their “Common Ground” tour. After a summer of bitter recall elections, Schultz and Cullen are pushing for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in Madison. They’re also introducing a constitutional amendment that would end Supreme Court elections in Wisconsin, and replace them with a merit-based selection program. Should justices be appointed rather than elected? Can Republicans and Democrats work together? Senators Schultz and Cullen will address those questions and more when they visit Eckstein Hall. Marquette Law School, Eckstein Hall, 12:15 to 1:15 p.m. Registration link.

Thursday, October 20—Wisconsin U.S. Representative Gwen Moore— After serving 16 years as a state lawmaker, Congresswoman Moore was elected to the House of Representatives in 2004. The Milwaukee Democrat represents Wisconsin’s 4th District, which includes Milwaukee and her alma mater, Marquette University. Moore is a member of the House Committee on Financial Services and the House Budget Committee. In addition to her committee work, Congresswoman Moore was elected Democratic co-chair of the Congressional Women’s Caucus by her female colleagues. She’ll discuss the critical issues facing this nation, and today’s political climate, during her appearance at the Law School. Marquette Law School, Eckstein Hall, 12:15 to 1:15 p.m. Registration link.

Tuesday, October 11—Abby Ramirez, Executive Director of Schools That Can Milwaukee—A former business executive, Abby Ramirez has quickly become a leading voice for education reform in Milwaukee. The goal of the organization she co-founded, Schools That Can Milwaukee, is to have 20,000 children in high-performing urban schools—public, charter, and choice—by 2020. To do that, Ramirez and her organization work to identify schools where children are succeeding, and then attempt to replicate those models across the city. In addition to her business background, Ramirez worked on public policy issues for a California-based foundation. A passionate believer in the power of education to transform, Ramirez received her B.S. in Commerce from the University of Virginia. She has an M.B.A. and M.A. in Education from Stanford University. Marquette Law School, Eckstein Hall, 12:15 to 1:15 p.m. Registration link.

We have long been a fan of Mike Gousha’s speakers series at the Law School. This is partly because it’s ideologically balanced, but also because Gousha has an excellent record of lining up the movers and shakers who matter in Wisconsin politics (and occasionally, in national politics). These aren’t the most profound intellectuals around, but you can’t really understand Wisconsin politics without hearing them and knowing how they think and what they say.

Warren Buffett is a Hypocrite in Three Ways

Jocoby makes a point that many others have made: if Buffett thinks he is under-taxed, he is perfectly free to make a voluntary contribution to the Treasury. It’s easy to do, and indeed the Treasury Department has a web page explaining how to do that.

But that’s just the beginning of his hypocrisy. As Jacoby notes:

Buffett isn’t greedy. He is an extraordinary philanthropist who has undertaken to give 99 percent of his immense fortune to charity, and who, with Bill Gates, actively encourages other billionaires to spend down half or more of their wealth in charitable donations.

And why is he giving all that money to charity instead of to Uncle Sam? Because, as he has said in interviews, he knows it will do more good that way and be used more effectively. Who would disagree? For all Buffett’s talk of being undertaxed, he believes what nearly everyone believes — that he can allocate his money more wisely than the government. And not just that he can, but that he should.

Indeed, Buffett has said:

Well, that’s a choice and it’s an option that... If I had to give it to a single individual, or make some young Buffett a multi-billionaire, or give it to the government, I’d absolutely give it to the government. I think that on balance the Gates Foundation, my daughter’s foundation, my two sons’ foundations, will do a better job with lower administrative costs and better selection of beneficiaries than the government.

Of course, there is one final form of hypocrisy that Buffett is engaged in.

By demanding that the rich be taxed at a higher rate, he becomes the darling of the liberals. The mainstream media dote over him. He is treated like some maverick who has put the interests of the country ahead of his own interests, and the interests of his social class.

Yet Buffett knows that Republicans in Congress will protect him (and other rich people) from the higher tax rates that he endorses! So he gets the best of both worlds: he is a hero to the liberals, and he still gets to keep his money — or dispose of it exactly as he chooses.

As Jacoby puts it:

When the Sage of Omaha calls for higher taxes, his words get plenty of attention. But his actions speak louder, and convey a markedly different message.

Buffett, in other words, is an example of the corruption that ensues when class warfare becomes a normal sort of politics.

Friday, August 19, 2011

More Gay Fascism: Teacher Suspended for Anti-Gay Marriage Views

A former “Teacher of the Year” in Mount Dora, Fla. has been suspended and could lose his job after he voiced his objection to gay marriage on his personal Facebook page.

Jerry Buell, a veteran American history teacher at Mount Dora High School, was removed from his teaching duties this week as school officials in Lake County investigate allegations that what he posted was biased towards homosexuals.

“We took the allegations seriously,” said Chris Patton, a communication officer with Lake County Schools. “All teachers are bound by a code of special ethics (and) this is a code ethics violation investigation.”

Patton said the school system received a complaint on Tuesday about something Buell had written last July when New York legalized same sex unions. On Wednesday, he was temporarily suspended from the classroom and reassigned.

Patton said Buell has taught in the school system for 22 years and has a spotless record. Last year, he was selected as the high school’s “Teacher of the Year.”

But now his job is on the line because of what some have called anti-gay and homophobic comments.

Buell told Fox News Radio that he was stunned by the accusations. “It was my own personal comment on my own personal time on my own personal computer in my own personal house, exercising what I believed as a social studies teacher to be my First Amendment rights,” he said.

The school system declined to comment on the specific Facebook messages that led to their investigation, but Buell provided Fox News Radio with a copy of the two Facebook messages that he said landed him in trouble.

The first was posted on July 25 at 5:43 p.m. as he was eating dinner and watching the evening news.

“I’m watching the news, eating dinner when the story about New York okaying same-sex unions came on and I almost threw up,” he wrote. “And now they showed two guys kissing after their announcement. If they want to call it a union, go ahead. But don’t insult a man and woman’s marriage by throwing it in the same cesspool of whatever. God will not be mocked. When did this sin become acceptable?”

Three minutes later, Buell posted another comment: “By the way, if one doesn’t like the most recently posted opinion based on biblical principles and God’s laws, then go ahead and unfriend me. I’ll miss you like I miss my kidney stone from 1994. And I will never accept it because God will never accept it. Romans chapter one.”

What is interesting about this is that if Buell had been a liberal teacher who lauded gay marriage, he would have no problem.

And if, instead of quoting the Bible, he had attacked the Bible as “homophobic,” that would be fine.

Quite simply, rejecting the Biblical view of homosexuality is now part of the official state religion, and heretics will be punished.

Buell’s attorney strongly disagreed and accused the school system of violating his First Amendment rights.

“The school district is being anti-straight, anti-First Amendment and anti-personal liberty,” said Horatio Mihet, an attorney with the Liberty Counsel. “The idea that public servants have to whole-heartedly endorse homosexual marriage is repugnant to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” Mihet told Fox News Radio.

“All he did was speak out on an issue of national importance and because his comments did not fit a particular mold, he is now being investigated and could possibly lose his job. What have we come to?”

Buell said he does not know the individual who filed the complaint, but the past week has caused his family “heartache.”

“To try and say you could lose your job over speaking about something in the venue that I did in the manner that I did is not just a knee-jerk reaction,” he said. “It’s a violent reaction to one person making a complaint.”

But Patton said the school system has an obligation to take the comments seriously. He said Buell will not be allowed back in the classroom “until we do all the interviews and do a thorough job of looking at everything – past or previous writings.”

Translation: Inquisition. Buell is charged with heresy, and the distinct will “investigate” whether he is indeed a heretic.

Buell believes the school system is trying to send a message to Christian teachers.

“There is an intimidation factor if you are a Christian or if you make a statement against it (gay marriage) you are a bigot, a homophobe, you’re a creep, you’re intolerant,” he said. “We should have the right to express our opinions and talk about things.”

Of course, voices representing the gay lobby simply don’t recognize any right to voice heresy.

Brett Winters, a former Mount Dora student, told the Orlando Sentinel he was disappointed about Buell’s comments. “This type of hateful language is dangerous not only to gay students, but also to anti-gay students,” Winters told the newspaper.

Michael Slaymaker, president of the Orlando Youth Alliance, told the newspaper that gay students might feel uncomfortable in Buell’s class.

“I would hope a teacher would be there to help them and not hurt them,” he told the Orlando Sentinel.

Of course, this reveals the crux of the issue.

Gay students are to be coddled and pandered to and never have to hear that their behavior is controversial. But Christian students have no such protection. One can’t imagine a liberal teacher who expresses support for gay marriage, either on a Facebook page or in the classroom, getting into trouble.

But of course Christian students would have an equal right to consider such a teacher hostile to them.

But their sensibilities don’t count among politically correct school bureaucrats.

Meanwhile, hundreds of people have joined at least two Facebook groups calling for the school system to reinstate the popular teacher. “He’s developed a reputation as being one of the most caring teachers in the school,” Mihet said.

Tuesday, August 09, 2011

Backing Away from the Brink: Marquette Will Not Suspend the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship

[Originally posted 8/5/11, 10:14 a.m. Updated and moved to the top.]

It was an obvious outrage: two administrators in Marquette’s Office of Student Affairs (Ian Jamieson and Erin Lazzar) ruled that the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship would be suspended on the campus for a year because they dismissed an officer of the organization who “came out” as homosexual, said he was involved in a homosexual affair which he would continue, and rejected Christian teaching about homosexuality.

The decision was appealed to Dean of Students Stephanie Quade who just this morning (Friday, August 5) reversed the ruling and lifted the suspension.

The group will be on probation for a year for violating a narrow clause of their constitution specifying the procedures for dismissing an officer. The organization will also have to submit to a review of their constitution. It is unclear, at the moment, what changes (if any) might be required in that document.

It appears, however, that Marquette has conceded the right of a campus Christian organization to hold officers to Christian standards of sexual conduct.

The Intervarsity Christian Fellowship mobilized a campaign among alumni to write Marquette in support of the organization. Quade acknowledged receiving a large number of e-mails, but maintained that they had no role in her decision to reverse the suspension.

Still an Outrage

In spite of this about face on the part of Student Affairs, it is still an outrage that a Christian student organization should be threatened with suspension for merely insisting that officers in the organization must maintain Christian standards of conduct.

Not only did two Student Affairs bureaucrats rule against the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, a staffer with the Campus Ministry (Steve Blaha) according to a source close to the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship encouraged the gay student to make the complaint.

I have no comment to provide. I understand you’ve been in contact with Dr. Stephanie Quade who would be the best person to address specific questions about conduct cases or hearing processes.

Quade provided only a terse and evasive statement, as follows:

As you know, there was a student conduct case involving IVCF and an initial finding that was amended upon appeal. The group was found responsible for violating published policies and action was taken.

This action dealt with adherence to university policies and procedures governing student organizations, in this case the need to follow the procedures set forth in the organization’s constitution.

This, of course, entirely evades the fact that the result of the first adjudication was that the organization was guilty of discrimination on the basis of “sexual orientation” and given a stiff punishment (a years suspension).

We responded to Quade asking her to confirm that the initial decision (by Erin Lazzar and Ian Jamieson) involved a charge of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. She has not responded.

Erin Lazzar failed to respond to a voice mail request for an interview, and Blaha declined to comment on the grounds of student confidentiality.

Marquette did issue an official statement on the issue. Kate Venne provided us with a copy:

Marquette University has placed the campus chapter of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship on probation for one year. The probation results from a finding that the chapter violated its own policies and procedures in dealing with a complaint.

This failure and the lack of clear communication regarding why action was taken caused significant personal hurt and resulted in allegations of discrimination.

No student conduct decision is final until the time in which to file an appeal has passed or an appeal is filed and decided. All students and student organizations have a right to appeal in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Student Conduct Code.

Marquette expects all student organizations to adhere to the university’s Statement on Human Dignity which “recognizes and cherishes the dignity of each individual regardless of age, culture, faith, ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, language, disability or social class.” We want all students to be successful both academically and personally, and we are working with various groups on campus to ensure an inclusive and supportive institutional environment of all students, faculty and staff.

This evasive and disingenuous statement stresses the one procedural infraction of which the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship was guilty (lack of due process in bouncing the sexually active gay officer) and entirely evades the fact that the original finding was discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. But the blather about “allegations of discrimination” and “inclusive environment” is an implicit admission that this is exactly what happened.

Conclusion

Marquette, in other words, acted like the politically correct institution it has become, siding with a sexually-active gay student who somehow thought he had a right to be an officer in the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, and in effect revoking the right of Christian student organizations to insist on Christian standards of conduct from their officers.

Pressure, including a letter writing campaign among the Intervarsity’s alumni and the outing of the action by radio host Mark Belling caused the university to back off. Now, of course, they won’t honestly admit a blunder.

Thursday, August 04, 2011

It was Mark Belling who first reported this at the very end of his show today, and we’ve been able to confirm some (but not all) of the details.

Apparently, an officer of the Marquette Intervarsity Christian Fellowship came “out of the closet” as gay. He made it quite clear that he disagreed with the organization’s interpretation of Christian teaching about homosexuality (which happens to be essentially identical to Catholic teaching about homosexuality).

He admitted to having a homosexual affair with another male, and made it clear that he did not intend to break it off. He was dismissed as an officer.

He complained to Student Affairs at Marquette, apparently claiming he was discriminated against because of his sexual orientation.

Belling reported that the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship has been suspended at Marquette on the basis of this complaint. According to Vice President for Student Affairs Chris Miller, this isn’t quite accurate. In fact, there was (within the past week) an adjudication of the issue, which upheld the complain of discrimination.

But the organization has not been suspended yet, since they have a right to appeal. The next step in the appeal process will be the Dean of Students, Stephanie Quade, who could, in theory at least, overturn the result of the adjudication.

Miller insisted on going on the record with some comments highly favorable to the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, calling them a “stellar student organization,” and a “great aspect” of student life at Marquette. He commended the interest that the organization’s alumni continue to take in the university.

Miller’s comments may signal that the Office of Student Affairs is willing to back down on this, but given Marquette’s recent record of caving in to each and every demand made by the campus gay lobby, one can’t be sure of that.

It’s clear that Marquette is not willing to stand up for Catholic teaching about homosexuality. The issue here is: are they even willing to tolerate it?

[Update 5:43 p.m. Thursday]

We just got this via e-mail from Stephanie Quade:

There was a student conduct hearing involving IVCF last week, the group appealed the outcome.

As I am the appellate officer in this matter, I cannot really comment on any of the specifics of the case while it is still pending, as I am sure you understand.

Hoping to have the appeal done by the end of the week.

We assume “end of the week” means tomorrow.

The original hearing was held by Student Affairs bureaucrats -- this being the summer, no students or faculty were involved.

Quade insists that her decision will be “final.”

It will be interesting to see how this turns out. We assume that the organization was charged with discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. But as we understand it, the problem wasn’t “orientation” but an actual homosexual affair, and the student’s outspoken rejection of Christian teaching about homosexuality.